lyonscc

The "no text" rule goes for any characters found on a keyboard. While there are simplified Chinese keyboards, pictographs aren't text and aren't found on their keyboards.

To think parallel to our own experience in America, if someone submitted a design that incorporated a "Peace" sign (the circle with a downward line and two forking lines), it would not be considered "text".

no1

The "no text" rule goes for any characters found on a keyboard. While there are simplified Chinese keyboards, pictographs aren't text and aren't found on their keyboards.

To think parallel to our own experience in America, if someone submitted a design that incorporated a "Peace" sign (the circle with a downward line and two forking lines), it would not be considered "text".

If it's rejected though, so be it. I wonder, then, if they ought to consider ANY symbol to be text, then - which would rule out a lot of designs that make it through the "no text" filters...

A pictogram like this IS Chinese text--it's part of the written language, just modified written characters. It's like saying that ornate Arabic calligraphy isn't text because the letters/words are nearly unrecognizable in their transformation into (usually) religious art symbols. A peace sign doesn't derive from any written language. It's an art symbol. I mean, sure, it might have some basis in some ancient Nordic runic alphabet, for all I know, but it isn't text. Comparing a peace symbol to modified modern Chinese text is like comparing the famous smiley face to graffiti signature tags. For example, in English, is this text? Yes, yes it is (for woot art purposes anyway). It's not any one letter, but it's definitely a bunch of letters put together to make a pictogram. And that pictogram is text (at woot).

lyonscc

goldenthorn wrote:A pictogram like this IS Chinese text--it's part of the written language, just modified written characters. It's like saying that ornate Arabic calligraphy isn't text because the letters/words are nearly unrecognizable in their transformation into (usually) religious art symbols. A peace sign doesn't derive from any written language. It's an art symbol. I mean, sure, it might have some basis in some ancient Nordic runic alphabet, for all I know, but it isn't text. Comparing a peace symbol to modified modern Chinese text is like comparing the famous smiley face to graffiti signature tags.

Or at least that's what I think.

Goldenthorn - Here's the Wikipedia article on Pictograms. They are ideographs (whose shape is supposed to convey a cultural meaning) not alphabetical (abstract shapes that represent phonemes - spoken sounds). You bring up the famous "Smiley face" - this would be an example of an English pictograph, whose meaning has to do with happiness. You wouldn't call a smiley face "text" the same way you wouldn't call a pictograph "text".

Chinese pictographs are not utilized to make other words, they stand on their own to have meaning.

goldenthorn

lyonscc wrote:Goldenthorn - Here's the Wikipedia article on Pictograms. They are ideographs (whose shape is supposed to convey a cultural meaning) not alphabetical (abstract shapes that represent phonemes - spoken sounds). You bring up the famous "Smiley face" - this would be an example of an English pictograph, whose meaning has to do with happiness. You wouldn't call a smiley face "text" the same way you wouldn't call a pictograph "text".

Chinese pictographs are not utilized to make other words, they stand on their own to have meaning.

Yes, I am completely familiar with what pictograms are and are not. I've got a few languages/alphabets under my belt and have dealt with that sort of thing.

Where I am confused--and am thus questioning the validity of your entry--is the origins of your particular pictogram. You mention the forest, but either I am incredibly blind or there is no mention of this pictogram anywhere. I don't know Chinese (Mandarin in this case, right?), but parts of the language symbols are extremely close/similar to this particular pictogram. I did a very quick search and I see no mention of it anywhere in relations to this forest.

So are you saying that you completely made up this pictogram and that you just drew it to look somewhat like Chinese characters? Or that this is an existing pictogram that represents this particular forest? If the latter is the case, then how do you know that it isn't based on an amalgamation of Chinese text--making it text according to woot (when they feel like enforcing that rule)--since you aren't familiar with the Chinese language or text?

Is there a link to where the meaning/background of this particular pictogram is described?

lyonscc

goldenthorn wrote:Are you saying that you completely made up this pictogram and that you just drew it to look somewhat like Chinese characters? Or that this is an existing pictogram that represents this particular forest? If the latter is the case, then how do you know that it isn't based on an amalgamation of Chinese text, since you aren't familiar with the Chinese language or text? Is there a link to where the meaning/background of this particular pictogram is described?

It's a little late (since this has been rejected), but there was a show (I think on the Discovery channel) that talked about how Chinese pictographs are created, and how they pre-date simplified Chinese writing. "Dream", "Ninja", "House" and some other common words were demonstrated (how they were made to look like what they represent). (Edit: See here)

Woot.com is operated by Woot Services LLC.
Products on Woot.com are sold by Woot, Inc., other than items on Wine.Woot which are sold by the seller specified on the product detail page.
Product narratives are for entertainment purposes and frequently employ
literary point of view;
the narratives do not express Woot's editorial opinion.
Aside from literary abuse, your use of this site also subjects you to Woot's
terms of use
and
privacy policy.
Woot may designate a user comment as a Quality Post, but that doesn't mean we agree with or guarantee anything said or linked to in that post.